Abstract
Abstract
Background
Clinical decision support (CDS) is a promising intervention for improving uptake of HIV testing and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). However, little is known regarding provider perspectives on acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of CDS for HIV prevention in pediatric primary care, a key implementation setting.
Methods
This was a cross-sectional multiple methods study utilizing surveys and in-depth interviews with pediatricians to assess acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of CDS for HIV prevention, as well as to identify contextual barriers and facilitators to CDS. Qualitative analysis utilized work domain analysis and a deductive coding approach grounded in the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research. Quantitative and qualitative data were merged to develop an Implementation Research Logic Model to conceptualize implementation determinants, strategies, mechanisms, and outcomes of potential CDS use.
Results
Participants (n = 26) were primarily white (92%), female (88%), and physicians (73%). Using CDS to improve HIV testing and PrEP delivery was perceived as highly acceptable (median score 5), IQR [4–5]), appropriate (5, IQR [4–5]), and feasible (4, IQR [3.75–4.75]) using a 5-point Likert scale. Providers identified confidentiality and time constraints as two key barriers to HIV prevention care spanning every workflow step. With respect to desired CDS features, providers sought interventions that were integrated into the primary care workflow, standardized to promote universal testing yet adaptable to the level of a patient’s HIV risk, and addressed providers’ knowledge gaps and bolstered self-efficacy in providing HIV prevention services.
Conclusions
This multiple methods study indicates that clinical decision support in the pediatric primary care setting may be an acceptable, feasible, and appropriate intervention for improving the reach and equitable delivery of HIV screening and PrEP services. Design considerations for CDS in this setting should include deploying CDS interventions early in the visit workflow and prioritizing standardized but flexible designs.
Funder
National Institute of Mental Health
Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Penn Center for AIDS Research Implementation Science in Philadelphia for Ending the HIV Epidemic Regionally
Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Pilot Award
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference61 articles.
1. Magnuson DH. Adolescent use of Truvada (FTC/TDF) for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in the United States (2012–2017). AIDS 2018: 22nd International AIDS Conference; July 23–27, 2018, 2018; Amsterdam, Netherlands.
2. Siegler AJ, Mouhanna F, Giler RM, Weiss K, Pembleton E, Guest J, et al. The prevalence of pre-exposure prophylaxis use and the pre-exposure prophylaxis-to-need ratio in the fourth quarter of 2017. United States Ann Epidemiol. 2018;28(12):841–9.
3. Goyal MK, Witt R, Hayes KL, Zaoutis TE, Gerber JS. Clinician adherence to recommendations for screening of adolescents for sexual activity and sexually transmitted infection/human immunodeficiency virus. J Pediatr. 2014;165(2):343–7.
4. Underwood JM, Brener N, Thornton J, Harris WA, Bryan LN, Shanklin SL, et al. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System - United States, 2019. MMWR Suppl. 2020;69(1):11–8.
5. Watson DL, Shaw PA, Petsis DT, Pickel J, Bauermeister JA, Frank I, et al. A retrospective study of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis counselling among non-Hispanic Black youth diagnosed with bacterial sexually transmitted infections in the United States, 2014–2019. J Int AIDS Soc. 2022;25(2): e25867.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献